Jump to content
C4 Forums | Control4

Why is Sonos (allegedly) in self destruct mode?


Recommended Posts


  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

It might be semantics. But Look the point is without innovation. Without people's pushing the boundaries. Without the EV's and Alan Chow's of this world working outside the conservative C4 framework, we would have never had a Sonos driver. We would never now have a Heos driver and we probably wouldn't even have Sonos hanging around wanting a "partnership.". But what the heck do I know. I'm just an everyday punter trying to get the most out of my platform and hobby. Cheers.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, wappinghigh said:

Looks *extremely* similar to the (old) Sonos one to me.... :)

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Unless you somehow have the ability to read encrypted code I don't think you're qualified to make that assessment. Since C4 controls the UI most if not all drivers will look the same however they can be written by entirely different teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, wappinghigh said:

 

It might be semantics. But Look the point is without innovation. Without people's pushing the boundaries. Without the EV's and Alan Chow's of this world working outside the conservative C4 framework, we would have never had a Sonos driver. We would never now have a Heos driver and we probably wouldn't even have Sonos hanging around wanting a "partnership.". But what the heck do I know. I'm just an everyday punter trying to get the most out of my platform and hobby. Cheers.

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

For what its worth I agree but you're barking up the wrong tree. Call Sonos and ask them why they don't have a published API like Dennon or Nuvo. Those companies have been around for a much shorter time and managed to create a real API.. Control4 has an API or you wouldn't have the existing Sonos driver.

Only one company dragging their feet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point I am making is simply this. Without third parties working outside the usual "C4" central way doing things, we would not be where we are today... with the abilityand choice  to use independent third party music streamers.. The Control4 multiroom music experience would still be one like Russound..

All the wonderful things third parties give us!.... in this ...the best HA platform! Anyway. Rock on C4... And thanks. (for allowing it to happen). Cheers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh I've worked that out ol sport.... that's why I'm ditching their product (as we speak). Cheers... 

For what its worth I agree but you're barking up the wrong tree. Call Sonos and ask them why they don't have a published API like Dennon or Nuvo. Those companies have been around for a much shorter time and managed to create a real API.. Control4 has an API or you wouldn't have the existing Sonos driver.

Only one company dragging their feet.

Which makes sense. Building out seamless robust drivers is a no brainer for C4. It enables the dealer base to roll out robust systems swiftly and build a content client base.

Sonos hate it as everything they have done to build a world class GUI is buried behind someone else's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find what Crestron and URC have done to be interesting. I'm not sure if C4 would ever be game to bump over to another app on their platform -- or even what that would look like.

It kind of goes against everything they've been saying for 10 years but if Crestron can do it and people cheer why not C4? Its not elegant but if you want elegance go with something other than Sonos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Control4 was reverse engineering the driver for years.

This is a bit of a problem Control4 face and buyers need to be aware of. Vendor lock in. Unlike Lutron, a 3rd party can't control Control4's lighting system. Once you go control4 there is no turning back, you are glued to a dealer. I still don't think a homeowner can adjust timers themselves in Control4? Correct me if I'm wrong.

Sonos was never built or designed with custom integrators in mind. It's not their business model. That's why they haven't released something such as a multichannel amplier. Sonos is selling straight to consumer. What integrators do with Sonos product is just "neat" to them, but never fully supported.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9.10.2016 at 5:08 PM, SMHarman said:

I'm so confused by this dlna statement. Why don't you keep local music on my music and streaming on HEOS. Problem solved?

1 - I don't have an HESO anymore due the stupid DLNA

2 - I don't have speaker wire in my house so I use Sonos to distribute the music for each room - so I rely on the Sonos/Heos music implementation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, blub said:

1 - I don't have an HESO anymore due the stupid DLNA

2 - I don't have speaker wire in my house so I use Sonos to distribute the music for each room - so I rely on the Sonos/Heos music implementation

Yes that is a very good point... and something people forget. It's easier to "ditch Sonos" when you have a 16 channel Control4 audio matrix in a project.... I have 10 Sonos zoneplayers... I'll be keeping one lying around until all this plays out.. :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, msgreenf said:

sure, but DLNA is superior then scanning.  Yes, you can do the old NAS path scanning, but if your NAS supports DLNA you are better off with DLNA, IMHO

Arguably - but the way you stated it it came across as it being required.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.